Navigation

    Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search

    WAN<->LAN bridge (sort of)?

    2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    2
    4
    1617
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • C
      clarknova last edited by

      I don't know why I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this, but I need some advice.

      I have an mlppp connection, and a single host that needs a static IP. Basically, I'm brokering the connection to relieve a Cisco host of the need to do mlppp.

      Everybody likes a diagram:

      Internet
         
      <mlppp>pfsense <lan>
                            Cisco

      I need to be able to assign the Cisco a static, publicly routable IP (or have it assigned via dhcp).

      I'm confident I could get a static IP on pfsense's WAN and a /29 public subnet on the LAN, from which to assign 1 address to pfsense's LAN interface, and 1 to the Cisco, but renting 5 IP addresses just to use 1 is wasteful. What I'm trying to figure out is if I can do it with less, but I don't see that as an option. It seems that if I bridge WAN to LAN then I've passed on the need to do mlppp to the Cisco and defeated myself, right?

      Alternatively, I could use 1:1 NAT and assign a private address to the Cisco, but I don't think that will be acceptable; ultimately I think I will need a public IP address there.

      Am I missing an option, or is static+subnet the only way to accomplish this?

      Thanks for looking.</lan></mlppp>

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cmb last edited by

        @clarknova:

        It seems that if I bridge WAN to LAN then I've passed on the need to do mlppp to the Cisco and defeated myself, right?

        Probably, your ISP likely assigns your one public IP to your MLPPP, hence whatever needs that public IP will have to do the MLPPP. Otherwise maybe they can route a single public IP to you in addition to that.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • C
          clarknova last edited by

          Ok, thanks. And oops, yeah, I meant /30 subnet on the LAN, not that it matters.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • C
            cmb last edited by

            Yeah they probably wouldn't route a single public IP to you (though they could and you could make it work that way, it's kinda ugly), probably be a /30.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • First post
              Last post

            Products

            • Platform Overview
            • TNSR
            • pfSense Plus
            • Appliances

            Services

            • Training
            • Professional Services

            Support

            • Subscription Plans
            • Contact Support
            • Product Lifecycle
            • Documentation

            News

            • Media Coverage
            • Press
            • Events

            Resources

            • Blog
            • FAQ
            • Find a Partner
            • Resource Library
            • Security Information

            Company

            • About Us
            • Careers
            • Partners
            • Contact Us
            • Legal
            Our Mission

            We provide leading-edge network security at a fair price - regardless of organizational size or network sophistication. We believe that an open-source security model offers disruptive pricing along with the agility required to quickly address emerging threats.

            Subscribe to our Newsletter

            Product information, software announcements, and special offers. See our newsletter archive to sign up for future newsletters and to read past announcements.

            © 2021 Rubicon Communications, LLC | Privacy Policy